Participatory Urban Planning

Lecture given by Irina Paraschivoiu of Paris Lodron University Salzburg

Participatory Action Based Research in Geoinformatics

As part of my undergraduate studies, I took a course on community based participatory action research. That class changed they way I thought about and conduct research but it was really only a brief overview of the topic. Which is why I so appreciated Ms. Paraschivoiu’s talk. Her talk was especially impactful not only because it was a deeper dive into a topic of interest for me, but more so because this is the type of research that I want to incorporate into my master’s thesis and my later work.

One of the most important concepts Ms. Paraschivoiu’s talk introduced me to was the idea of Arnstein’s Ladder of public participation. Previously I had not given much thought to the quality of public participation in a project. I did not know there were distinct levels of participation and that not all levels were equal or effective. I had thought any participation was good participation but I came to realize through this talk that not all ways in which we engage a community are genuine efforts to involve them in a process concerning their community.

The most interesting parts of this talk to me were those that discussed inclusion and power. Ms. Paraschivoiu made the bold statement that “participation implies a redistribution of power” and that reminded me of one of the most shocking moments of realization I had when I first was introduced to community based participatory action research. When I learning about participatory research I came to realize that through my studies I had become rather arrogant. I had unconsciously adopted the belief that only the only valid opinion and ideas on a topic were those that came from experts and in the process had mentally devalued local knowledge. The central tenant of community based participatory research is to center the decision-making process in the community; community members are meant to lead, from defining the problem, to leading meetings, to approving processes and solutions and outside experts were meant only as support and had to be invited in by the commuity. This completely flipped my view of community-based research and project implementation.

I think there is a tendency for people outside of communities, especially those who have expertise in a topic, to feel like they have the right answer to a community problem because they have studied it extensively or are more impartial. I believe this is where we run into problems, why community issues persist despite huge investments of time and money into fixing them. Overall, in the field of geoinformatics there seems to be a tendency to dismiss lived experiences, qualitative data, and local knowledge and ideas (especially if these local communities are seen as uneducated). We sometimes forget that there is no better teacher than experience, and that even if you have studied an area or a topic extensively, it is not that same as someone’s lived experience. No one knows more about a problem than someone who is directly affected by it. Locals have more context, a deeper understanding of the causes of problems in their community and the social and cultural barriers to implementing a solution. More than that, when experts are brought in to fix a problem and there is no engagement with the community there is a high risk that incorrect solutions might be implemented. The risk experts run when they specialize in an certain areas is that they may only develop one problem solving tool, so when faced with a problem they only have one type of solutions. As the saying goes, every problem looks like nail when your only tool is a hammer. Genuine community participation and guidance can help guard against this and can help tailor a effective solution to their specific community. Experts and community members need to be true partners in order to solve persistent community problems.

In her talk, Ms. Paraschivoiu focused on how community participation is a necessary component of city panning, on how city planning cannot succeed without dialogue, engagement, and trial and error. However, I believe these components are applicable on a larger scale. These components of participatory research apply to a great deal within the field of geoinformatics, and really to any project that affects a community. Overall, Ms. Paraschivoiu’s talk gave me a more nuanced understanding of participatory research and reminded me of the necessity of community participation when trying to ameliorate wicked problems which will hopefully help to make my work more impactful, so here’s to better research!

Twitter  facebook  Email